Pro-life Margaret Sanger Vs Reality

Discussion in 'Abortion' started by Fugazi, Aug 22, 2013.

  1. Fugazi

    Fugazi New Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Nov 29, 2012
    Messages:
    17,057
    Likes Received:
    96
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Margaret Sanger quotes have been doing the rounds in a few threads here, so thought perhaps it was about time to dispel the propaganda machine of pro-lifers who willfully misrepresent, change and basically lie about what she said and did.

    Now let me get a couple of things out of the way before the usual suspect come in and start shrieking -

    1. Personally I don't support the idea of eugenics
    2. Any comment that is not relevant to the topic will be ignored and reported, so if you feel like just trying to de-rail the thread because you don't or can't answer it 'aint gonna work.

    Now I fully expect this thread to be ignored by pro-lifers as they don't want to be associated with defending lies.

    The site I shall be referencing for the pro-life version of her quotes is one used by a number of pro-lifers here, that site is Diane Dew.com

    I shall be using various sites that show the true quotes and there context.

    The cherry picked words will be underlined in the actual text.

    so let us begin.

    Firstly the words "human weeds" and "reckless breeders" do not appear anywhere in her book The Pivot of Civilization.

    http://www.gutenberg.org/files/1689/1689-h/1689-h.htm - Chapter X 3rd Paragraph from Chapter End

    So we can see from the outset that the tone is set by the pro-lifer, firstly using words attributed to Sanger that are not even in the book they cite, and then an out of context quote.

    I can find no reference to the 1923 speech that David Kennedy extrapolated his opinion from, on page 117 of his book - http://books.google.co.uk/books/yup...08&source=gbs_toc_r&cad=2#v=onepage&q&f=false - he attributes a quote - "Pathological worship of mere number" to Sanger, which when reading her book Pivot of civilization is clearly not her quote at all; - http://archive.org/stream/pivotofcivilizat00sanguoft#page/176/mode/2up - but is in fact a quote from Everett Dean Martin's The Behavior of Crowds - http://www.gutenberg.org/files/40914/40914-h/40914-h.htm so if he cannot even get this right what else has he got wrong.

    Yet again I can find nothing in the Birth Control Review, April 1923 that comes anywhere near this assumption of what she advocated - http://library.lifedynamics.com/Birth Control Review/1932-04 April.pdf - Page 107-108

    **Warning - the above does show her eugenics .. but please remember this post is not about her views but about the misrepresentation of her words**

    This remark, attributed originally to Sanger, was made by Dr. Edward A. Kempf and has been cited out of context and with distorted meaning. Dr. Kempf, a progressive physician, was actually arguing for state endowment of maternal and infant care clinics. In her book The Pivot of Civilization, Sanger quoted Dr. Kempf's argument about how environment may improve human excellence:
    "Society must make life worth the living and the refining for the individual by conditioning him to love and to seek the love-object in a manner that reflects a constructive effect upon his fellow-men and by giving him suitable opportunities. The virility of the automatic apparatus is destroyed by excessive gormandizing or hunger, by excessive wealth or poverty, by excessive work or idleness, by sexual abuse or intolerant prudishness. The noblest and most difficult art of all is the raising of human thoroughbreds (Sanger, 1922 [1969]).

    It was in this spirit that Sanger used the phrase, "Birth Control: To Create a Race of Thoroughbreds," as a banner on the November 1921 issue of the Birth Control Review. (Differing slogans on the theme of voluntary family planning
    sometimes appeared under the title of The Review, e.g., "Dedicated to the Cause of Voluntary Motherhood," January 1928.)

    and in context without the change of word to "aim"

    http://library.lifedynamics.com/Birth Control Review/1919-05 May.pdf

    The only places I can find any reference to this quote are pro-life, none of the quoted piece appears anywhere in her book Happiness in Marriage - https://www.lifedynamics.com/library/#birthcontrol

    I love this misrepresented quote, it really starts to show the pro-life obsession with lies and cherry-picking, the full item when read puts this into the proper context ;

    Part 2 later.
     
  2. Agent_Babylon

    Agent_Babylon New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2013
    Messages:
    436
    Likes Received:
    6
    Trophy Points:
    0
    It just really goes to show you how much more civil and honest pro-choicers are than the pro-"lifers" on this forum. Even though she was a pro-"life" activist, pro-choicers manage to take a fair look at her.

    The problem that many people face here is that pro-"lifers" are addicted to hating Planned Parenthood. Doesn't matter that Sanger was pro-"life", they hate her because she founded the largest abortion provider in the USA. Their hatred blinds them and they won't let reality change that. Telling the truth about Sanger would mean taking away ammo from their psychotic Planned Parenthood rants and we can't have that.
     
  3. churchmouse

    churchmouse New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 1, 2012
    Messages:
    4,739
    Likes Received:
    45
    Trophy Points:
    0
    lmao

    lmao

    lmao
     
  4. churchmouse

    churchmouse New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 1, 2012
    Messages:
    4,739
    Likes Received:
    45
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Planned Parenthood is the countries largest abortion mill. They now want to give abortificients to 11 year old babies. They don't care about parental rights...only promoting sex.

    And they promote sex.

    They have done underhanded things and are once again under investigation for illegal activities...one being hiding rapes from the authorities.

    But your community denies anything that PP would do that could be bad. You just would never admit it. All their clinics are safe and no deaths have ever happened on their properties. It is your community in denial.

    The thing is...Sanger said what she said and there is nothing you can do to take that away.

    Wiki says, "Eugenics

    Sanger was a eugenist and a racist and PP promoted white supremacy, it still does today.

    You can not erase what PP or Sanger did.

    What is the number one killer of blacks in the United States?
    ABORTION.



    She was a racist...went to KKK meetings...and associated with racists. Now you can stand on her work promoting birth control but you can't deny her intentions and her actions that were racist.
     
  5. Agent_Babylon

    Agent_Babylon New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2013
    Messages:
    436
    Likes Received:
    6
    Trophy Points:
    0
    11 year old babies?! LOL!

    And yet, she is one of your very own, darling! :hug: Just shows racism is a part of the pro-"life" movement.
    Deal with it.
     
  6. Pasithea

    Pasithea Banned at Members Request Past Donor

    Joined:
    Feb 26, 2011
    Messages:
    6,971
    Likes Received:
    83
    Trophy Points:
    0
    11 year old babies? Really? I think plenty of 11 year olds would take offense to being referred to as 'babies'. Babies are 1-2 years, toddlers 2-3, and 10-12 is definitely considered preteen years, not the baby years.

    Good. Their investigation will find that all their idiotic and irrational claims are totally unfounded once again for the umpteenth time. I hope you guys waste plenty of money trying to sniff out all the dirty little secrets you speculate PP has under their rugs. Good luck with that.

    Well considering that so far not a single one of the lunatic claims has been found to be true by all these secret, underground investigations then of course we'd deny that all your irrational claims that PP does this and that would be untrue. If they ever come up with some real proof that PP is doing something illegal then you can trumpet day and night about it, until then though you've got squat.

    Exactly, like how she expressed that she was totally against abortion you'd think lifers would point THAT little factoid out on the regular and even support her for it...oh but wait, she promoted birth control so of course you'd hate her. How dare she try and help women in poverty prevent pregnancy and take control of their own fertility! Gee, what an awful lady. :roll:

    Why would we want to? She made incredible leaps and bounds for women's healthcare. That is a good thing.

    If a black woman wants to have an abortion what are you going to do? Tell her she's a racist for having one?

    Our Founding Father's were racist slave owners. Now tell me this, do you celebrate these men or do you condemn them for the fact that they were racist and owned slaves? Or do you just pick and choose which racists in history to hate and despise?
     
  7. churchmouse

    churchmouse New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 1, 2012
    Messages:
    4,739
    Likes Received:
    45
    Trophy Points:
    0
    An eleven year old is a baby.. Edit/Baiting
     
  8. Cady

    Cady Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Feb 28, 2010
    Messages:
    8,661
    Likes Received:
    99
    Trophy Points:
    48
    A baby is from birth to one year. Sheesh.
     
  9. Fugazi

    Fugazi New Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Nov 29, 2012
    Messages:
    17,057
    Likes Received:
    96
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Just like to remind everyone of what I put in the OP

    2. Any comment that is not relevant to the topic will be ignored and reported, so if you feel like just trying to de-rail the thread because you don't or can't answer it 'aint gonna work.

    I have already reported a number of comments which are not related to the OP.

    I would humbly suggest that other do the same, don't respond to off topic posts and report them.
     
  10. churchmouse

    churchmouse New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 1, 2012
    Messages:
    4,739
    Likes Received:
    45
    Trophy Points:
    0
    It is funny that when someone loves abortion as much as it is shown on this forum they will ignore any truth about it. Which one of you would have anything to do with the KKK? How many of you would attend a meeting? How many of you would befriend people, radicals associated that were associated with Hitler?
    Sanger was brilliant I will give her that. She duped the black population into thinking they liked them and only cared for their access to birth control. She basically lied and presented a different front. Sorta like Obama does today. He thinks he is more white than black...but ran saying he was more black and white.

    She was a racist in every way shape or form. And the fact that you would deny this...shows.....well, can't say it.

    We are not talking about blacks wanting or not wanting babies. From the start clinics were set up in neighborhoods that were primarily black...where the weeds were growing. How do you explain the comments she made about blacks?

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UlvtG6rQJoc&feature=player_embedded


    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5UdtLh5jnTI

    Eugenics...white master race by wiping out bloodlines. These liberals thought they were doing a blessing for the world.

    You can just substitute the unborns bones with what you see in this video...it is the same genocide that happened in the film.

    The pro-abort movement fits all these categories..and Sanger was at the forefront of them all.

    I will end with this....

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HBosDWFPV1I
     
  11. churchmouse

    churchmouse New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 1, 2012
    Messages:
    4,739
    Likes Received:
    45
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I tried to do this in my Christian and abortion thread.........as people tried to derail that...maybe you will have more luck.

    I will be happy to post as much as I can about Sanger....
     
  12. Fugazi

    Fugazi New Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Nov 29, 2012
    Messages:
    17,057
    Likes Received:
    96
    Trophy Points:
    0
    and I will be just as happy to debunk it all.
     
  13. churchmouse

    churchmouse New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 1, 2012
    Messages:
    4,739
    Likes Received:
    45
    Trophy Points:
    0
    LMAO...yea.

    And what sources will you use....pro-choice propaganda?

    The ones who want to rewrite history?
     
  14. Gorn Captain

    Gorn Captain Banned

    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2012
    Messages:
    35,580
    Likes Received:
    237
    Trophy Points:
    0
    What sources will you use...."pro-life" propaganda and FAKED pictures of Sanger "hanging out with Klansmen"???
     
  15. churchmouse

    churchmouse New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 1, 2012
    Messages:
    4,739
    Likes Received:
    45
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Let us take these.

    "No woman can call herself free who does not own and control her body. No woman can call herself free until she can choose consciously whether she will or will not be a mother."
    Margaret Sanger

    Would she have been pro-choice or pro-life today base on this quote? Does controlling her body mean not being able to have an abortion? Was she a hypocrite?

    How about this one. ""The most merciful thing that a large family does to one of its infant members is to kill it."
    Margaret Sanger, Women and the New Race (Eugenics Publ. Co., 1920, 1923)
     
  16. Fugazi

    Fugazi New Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Nov 29, 2012
    Messages:
    17,057
    Likes Received:
    96
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I have no need to do that, her writings, speeches and letters are all out in the public domain .. which is why it is ludicrous for pro-life sites to misrepresent them, its far to easy to check.
     
  17. Fugazi

    Fugazi New Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Nov 29, 2012
    Messages:
    17,057
    Likes Received:
    96
    Trophy Points:
    0
    She would have been pro-choice on birth control and pro-life on abortions, as she plainly states

    The Public Papers Of Margaret Sanger

    or here

    From The Catholic Thing - Margaret Sanger Abortion Is Dangerous And Vicious

    ------

    Ah yes the standard pro-life Sanger quote. This statement is taken out of context from Sanger's Woman and the New Race (Sanger, 1920).
    Sanger was making an ironic comment — not a prescriptive one — about the horrifying rate of infant mortality among large families of early 20th-century urban America. The statement, as grim as the conditions that prompted Sanger to make it, accompanied a chart, illustrating the infant death rate in 1920:

     
  18. Agent_Babylon

    Agent_Babylon New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2013
    Messages:
    436
    Likes Received:
    6
    Trophy Points:
    0
    No, a baby is anything before the first year. Nice try at sensationalism, CM.


    Edit/Reply to deleted
     
  19. Fugazi

    Fugazi New Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Nov 29, 2012
    Messages:
    17,057
    Likes Received:
    96
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Part 2.

    The Immigration laws of 1924 ALREADY barred the same people as listed in that review so Sanger was just echoing and expanding the already current racist laws in force in the USA of that time, and this law was closely linked to the Eugenics majority of the Immigration Restriction League, with the passage of the Immigration Act of 1924, eugenicists for the first time played an important role in the Congressional debate as expert advisers on the threat of "inferior stock" from eastern and southern Europe. The new act, inspired by the eugenic belief in the racial superiority of "old stock" white Americans as members of the "Nordic race" (a form of white supremacy), strengthened the position of existing laws prohibiting race-mixing. Eugenic considerations also lay behind the adoption of incest laws in much of the U.S. and were used to justify many anti-miscegenation laws.

    Thus Sanger was echoing the already eugenic motivated immigration laws of 1924.

    Source -1924 Immigration Act

    -----------------
     
  20. Fugazi

    Fugazi New Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Nov 29, 2012
    Messages:
    17,057
    Likes Received:
    96
    Trophy Points:
    0
    What all you pro-lifers seem to forget is that Sanger was part of the eugenics movement that was at the forefront of American politics for the time period, even to the extent of passing the Immigration law of 1924, upon which leading eugenics advocates gave expert witness statements to .. a law I add that was not repealed until 1965.

    The fact that she attended meetings with KKK members wives would not have been that unusual in that time period, to use modern standards to judge her by, while appealing, is just wrong, add to that-that she spoke to them about birth control and not their racist agenda.

    As far as Germany is concerned, again this is prior to world war 2 and many leading Americans admired and supported the Nazi regime in Germany, including the future president J.F. Kennedy, again it is easy to judge these people based on what we know now .. as they say the benefit of hindsight is a wonderful thing.

    That statement requires evidence.

    Off topic and reported

    no more or less than the majority of the US people of that time.

    Sanger never used the comment "weeds" in any of her writings. This quote is wrongly attributed to here and it's first instance is found in an anonymous flyer entitled "Facts About Planned Parenthood", distributed by anti-family activists, Sanger NEVER in her lifetime promoted abortion, in fact she was against it.

    The first clinic she opened was at 46 Amboy St. in the Brownsville neighborhood of Brooklyn, providing contraception and birth control advice to the mainly poverty stricken people who lived there (not abortions as she was against them), Sanger recognized that the largest families were usually found in the poorest areas, which were predominantly non-white due to the still racist nature of the majority of US people .. her ideas were that if the poorest could regulate the number of children in the family they had a better chance of improving their lives, to be also noted is the fact that abortion, although technically illegal, was available .. but only if you could afford the cost, the majority of non-whites could not.

    Everything in this video is either a mis-quote, taken out of context or just cobbled together to make it say something other than the actual.

    Unable to listen to these at the moment, so will withhold comment until I can.

    Off topic and reported

    Do you actually have any idea at all what eugenics is

    Eugenics - noun - [treated as singular] - the science of improving a population by controlled breeding to increase the occurrence of desirable heritable characteristics.

    It is a science, one that was hijacked by racists in order to further there goals .. where in that definition does it say anything about a specific race .. it doesn't.

    Again one I can't listen to at the moment

    Fallacy - appeal-to-fear

    Will have to wait to comment on the videos presented, but will comment on the highlighted statement, just two words are required in order to do so - prove it.
     
  21. churchmouse

    churchmouse New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 1, 2012
    Messages:
    4,739
    Likes Received:
    45
    Trophy Points:
    0
    It is no surprise that the "feeble" Sanger describes are the NEGROES as she calls them.

    About sterilization. Grannie you see this as a good...so you would probably have hopped aboard the Sanger train. You said, "Sterilization is good, it enables men and women to stop making children when they choose. It is the most reliable birth control available."

    Cady said this...." Why single out Margaret Sanger for demonization? If she supported forced sterilization, then virtually everyone did. For decades, all 50 states had compulsory sterilization laws."

    Ok then all the people who owned slaves...get a free pass. All those that killed the witches in Salem had a right to do so. It was the times they lived in, right?

    But then Cady said, "You do understand, don't you--you simply can't judge past actions by present day standards."
    I think what she is saying is that yes Sanger unfortunately was quite possibly for forced sterilization, and while the actions of our government leaned towards eugenics...she was justified in doing so.

    What I find fault with Sanger is her racism...not particularly her birth control ideas. It is to whom the birth control is aimed at and why? She was a racist. I have read her books and while it does seem like her position is hypocritical about abortion, (mirroring many here on this forum today...) I believe today she would be pro-abortion and vocal about that. Its the sign of the times to be pro-abortion so says the pro-aborts on this forum.

    I am told by Sanger lovers here that she could do no wrong...and they will defend her no matter what she said and did. And if our government sanctioned forced sterilization, it was ok and anyone who went along with it gets a free pass. Sorta like...slavery was legal so everyone who had slaves...was just doing what was legal and acceptable. I think we all can agree that slavery in any scenario is wrong. I don't care who owned them...or what time period they lived in...no excuse. Slavery is wrong and it is a dark part of American History...as I believe eugenics was.

    Skinner V. Oklahoma (1942) ruled against punitive sterilization. After Americans saw what happened in Germany, what the Nazis did things changed. They could see the evils in eugenics...that it targets certain people, the "feeble" the "Negroes" as Sanger put it. American states started getting rid of their sterilization programs.

    Sangers goals were destroyed. I love what RPA1 said in his post about this.

    "Sanger's belief was that racial 'purification' could be accomplished by monetary reward to those who chose sterilization. Her whole thrust was to convince the mentally 'feeble' not to procreate......Although she did not specifically demand forced sterilization all her efforts and power were applied to the mentally 'feeble' (Negros in her words) in an effort to limit their numbers which she saw as a threat to civilization."

    She was a racist.

    And what color would this race of thoroughbreds be?

    Yes, lets get some black preachers on board who will do our work for us. And they did..they preached her hatred without even knowing her goal. She really was brilliant. Look at those who blindly followed Hitler....same thing. And today who preaches the merits of abortion, especially to our youth in public schools? The NEA...who is in bed with the Democratic Party...who was and is the party of racism.

    Would not tolerate bigotry....how do you do this if you think that lighter skinned is superior to dark skin?

    The fact remains.... Sanger was a supporter of Eugenics and even directed her efforts to her 'Negro Project.' This was a program to control the population growth of Negroes. Today her legacy lives on through PP as I believe blacks are targeted still today.

    Look at her terminology. "Stop breeding THESE THINGS." Is she talking about people here? Who is she talking about? Who here has not had some health issue of some kind? Most all people do....Who here is a member of Mensa? Who here has a doctoral degree in something? And who here was born into a family who struggled financially? How many of our parents struggled? Her comments are outrageous.

    Segregation, why? God this is Hitler talking. And she calls it a Plan for Peace? Was she so right that today we should take her up on her vision and segregate the population?

    How many here would agree to that? Lets segregate the poor, the handicapped, the unintelligent, and the NEGROES? Any of you guys going to pack your bags? She would have had you pack if you fit into one of these categories of undesirables.

    Oh wow...they get a choice. Be segregated in a concentration camp like setting...or get sterilized.

    Who is fit and who is unfit? She puts people in categories...desirable (fit) undesirable (unfit) And the unfit are a menace. So if any of you have poor people in your family who are struggling, if you have handicapped who need help and assistance, if you are a Negroe if you are not very intelligent...might work as a plumber or garbage collector, window washer, field laborer, any blue color job..etc...you might make it into her UNFIT category. And you should be segregated...or you should get sterilized. This statement of hers is outrageous. It aligns with what Hitler was doing. And she is saying...we should not feel bad about what needs to be done.

    I will end this post with this jewel from Sanger.

    I am told my stance or position on abortion comes from emotion...that it clouds my vision and thinking on the issue. But here we see Sanger confessing that emotion was of the utmost importance in her work and vision. That her experience led her...into her work. But yet I am here as the only one who really has experienced abortion first hand and I am told everything I say is wrong. So much for experience, right?
    I bring the emotion I have to the table...with scientific fact and research...and yet everything I post or any other pro-lifer here, is dismissed because the group is so pro-abortion they won't investigate the merits of the research.

    I would not be opposed to PP if they just handed out birth control (barrier), did mammograms, pap tests...and helped with family planning and educated our youth on reproduction and fetal gestation. But that is not what they are all about. Their bread and butter is killing a life already started.
    They hand out pills that could kill unborn lives, they don't do mammograms....and they don't teach about fetal gestation and what abortion really does. They are not neutral...and Sanger wasn't either. She was specific about who needed to go. And today most the babies murdered were as she would put it Negros babies. And most the PP clinics are in poor minority neighborhoods.

    She might have make a real good apple pie....but she was a racist and her words and actions showed that she was.
     
  22. Cady

    Cady Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Feb 28, 2010
    Messages:
    8,661
    Likes Received:
    99
    Trophy Points:
    48
    She never singled out any race as unfit or feeble. Is it wrong that Sanger used the word "NEGROES"? That was the preferred designation at the time.
    http://oxforddictionaries.com/us/definition/american_english/Negro

    Are you supposed to be quoting specific posters without providing a link to the post? I think you purposely omitted a link to a thread where you have been previously debunked: http://www.politicalforum.com/abortion/234742-margaret-sanger.html

    Just to clarify Sanger's views about sterilization, here they are in her own words:

     
  23. VanishingPoint

    VanishingPoint Active Member

    Joined:
    Jun 15, 2013
    Messages:
    1,156
    Likes Received:
    22
    Trophy Points:
    38
    It is easier to get lost in hate than to look for the answers. Looking for truth in anything is much harder.
     
  24. VanishingPoint

    VanishingPoint Active Member

    Joined:
    Jun 15, 2013
    Messages:
    1,156
    Likes Received:
    22
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Cady, you will never convince a heretic with a cause to see truth but others enjoy reading your post. I do.
     
    Cady and (deleted member) like this.
  25. Fugazi

    Fugazi New Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Nov 29, 2012
    Messages:
    17,057
    Likes Received:
    96
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Negro was the standard way to address and talk about the black population of the time, and as yet you haven't produced a single thing (apart from your own opinion) that shows that any of her words were directly aimed at the black population.

    And it is, if the people who want to be sterilized choose to have it done .. that is the problem here, pro-lifers son't want people to make choices.

    got no problem with you saying anything you like about Sanger .. my problem is that pro-life sites mis-quote, misrepresent or just downright lie about what she wrote and said.

    You can certainly judge people based on today's standards .. however that judgement needs to be tempered when the majority opinion and policy of the time actually support it, that is what you cannot do.

    Problem is you haven't shown a single piece of evidence to support that Sanger was racist, it is all assumption on the part of pro-lifers ... which is odd as she was firmly entrenched in the pro-life agenda as far as abortion is concerned.

    Absolute rubbish, I defend her words from being misquoted, misrepresented and lied about .. what ever else she stood for is irrelevant, the fact remains that pro-lifers are basically lying about what she said and wrote .. and of she was such a "bad" person why is there a need to misquote, misrepresent or lie about what she said and wrote.

    and as already posted the 1924 Immigration Act basically supported Sangers views of that time, and yet again you are failing to understand what eugenics actually is .. sure it was used as a tool in the racist agenda, but that is not what eugenics is.

    and as said before neither you or RPA1 have provided a single piece of evidence to support that Sanger was a racist, everything you have used is based purely upon your opinion by misrepresenting her words, that is dishonest.

    That is the opinion of a single writer, and as yet I have found nothing to support it .. neither is it possible to check the source material as the alleged speech is not available (as far as I can find) to read.

    and this has been debunked so many times, which you choose to willfully ignore .. so I'll just re-post what is already in the OP

    "This remark, attributed originally to Sanger, was made by Dr. Edward A. Kempf and has been cited out of context and with distorted meaning. Dr. Kempf, a progressive physician, was actually arguing for state endowment of maternal and infant care clinics. In her book The Pivot of Civilization, Sanger quoted Dr. Kempf's argument about how environment may improve human excellence:
    "Society must make life worth the living and the refining for the individual by conditioning him to love and to seek the love-object in a manner that reflects a constructive effect upon his fellow-men and by giving him suitable opportunities. The virility of the automatic apparatus is destroyed by excessive gormandizing or hunger, by excessive wealth or poverty, by excessive work or idleness, by sexual abuse or intolerant prudishness. The noblest and most difficult art of all is the raising of human thoroughbreds (Sanger, 1922 [1969]).

    It was in this spirit that Sanger used the phrase, "Birth Control: To Create a Race of Thoroughbreds," as a banner on the November 1921 issue of the Birth Control Review. (Differing slogans on the theme of voluntary family planning
    sometimes appeared under the title of The Review, e.g., "Dedicated to the Cause of Voluntary Motherhood," January 1928.)"

    Colour was never an issue with Sanger and is merely a figment of your imagination.

    I'd advise all to actually read the relevant pages and form their own opinion, because the above is just that - an opinion.

    pivot of civilization #page 80

    Again debunked in the OP of this thread, as follows;

    "Sanger was aware of African-American concerns, passionately argued by Marcus Garvey in the 1920s,
    that birth control was a threat to the survival of the black race. This statement, which acknowledges those fears, is taken from a letter to Clarence J. Gamble, M.D., a champion of the birth control movement. In that letter, Sanger describes her
    strategy to allay such apprehensions. A larger portion of the letter makes Sanger's meaning clear:

    "It seems to me from my experience . . . in North Carolina, Georgia, Tennessee, and Texas, that while the colored Negroes have great respect for white doctors, they can get closer to their own members and more or less lay their cards on the table. . . . They do not do this with the white people, and if we can train the Negro doctor at the clinic, he can go among them with enthusiasm and with knowledge, which, I believe, will have far-reaching results. . . . His work, in my
    opinion, should be entirely with the Negro profession and the nurses, hospital, social workers, as well as the County's white doctors. His success will depend upon his personality and his training by us. The minister's work is also important, and also he should be trained, perhaps by the Federation, as to our ideals and the goal that we hope to reach. We do not want word to go out that we want to exterminate the Negro population, and the minister is the man who can straighten out that idea if it ever occurs to any of their more rebellious members (Sanger, 1939, December). "

    not at all, Sanger realized that the Negro population had little trust in the white man due to the still racist majority of that time, she realised that in order to get the message of birth control to the negro population that it would need to come from their own ministers.

    what you believe is irrelevant, without facts it is nothing.

    Terminology that fitted the time she lived in, and yes her comments are outrageous to us in this time .. that still doesn't give pro-lifers the right to misquote, misrepresent or lie about what she said and wrote.

    Merely the pronouncement of her ideas, ideas echoed by the government of her time as can be seen in the 1924 immigration act.

    Why do pro-lifers feel the need to add items into her words, where in that review are the words "concentration camp" used, that is just an opinion of the writer of this misrepresented quote, and as can be seen from the actual text the idea was to give these people land and a homsteads.

    http://library.lifedynamics.com/Birth Control Review/1932-04 April.pdf

    I will respond to the rest of the post later.
     

Share This Page